Caught Between Washington and Tehran - Britain’s Limitations in the Middle East

On the 28th of February, the United States and Israel launched a series of strikes on Iran as part of Operation Epic Fury (USCENTCOM, 2026). This has caused a range of issues for Keir Starmer and Britain. There is a choice to be made by the UK: join Washington and engage in military action against Iran, or sit out and attempt to mediate a ceasefire, at the displeasure of President Trump. Already, under a week into this crisis, Starmer has been engulfed in a political controversy over his actions, as Trump claimed that he is ‘very disappointed’ with the PM (Stringer, 2026). What are the options left for Starmer’s Britain?

It is important to put Britain’s position in the Middle East into context. Britain has been greatly involved in the politics of the region since the Napoleonic Wars, still having colonies and dependencies in the Persian Gulf as late as the 1970s (Liberation, 2025). It went to war alongside the US in Iraq on two occasions (1991 and 2003) and still has key military bases in Bahrain and the UAE, alongside troops being deployed across other key partner nations (Croft & Gooch, 2026). These are the bases and forces that President Trump has called on to be mobilised in his operations against Iran, and which Starmer has shied away from utilising in the early days of this conflict. Britain has remained a prominent actor in the geopolitics of the region throughout the last century and has worked closely with partners such as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) on key economic matters. Therefore, how Britain responds to this current crisis is being closely watched by nations both in the region and around the world. Starmer will resultantly need to consider the global scale of political, economic, and military repercussions of any actions he decides to take.

Politically, the Middle East has been a delicate region over the last century. Britain has made alliances and partnerships with many of the nations in the area, most of which oppose the current Iranian regime. It also has to consider the American factor. Britain’s special relationship has been an important feature of international relations for the UK, and remains crucial for British power projection (Hadden & Rutter, 2025). Hence, Starmer cannot risk the US alliance by looking indecisive on Iran, despite any regional sensitivities.

Economically, Britain has close ties with many of the states in the Middle East, currently brokering a free trade agreement (FTA) with the GCC (Webb, 2026). Additionally, Britain has negotiated carefully with Washington over the issue of tariffs and continues to seek closer cooperation with the world’s foremost economic power (Labiak, 2025). This current economic interdependence gives Starmer little space to diverge from America and its allies' strategy without endangering crucial economic discussions. 

Militarily, Britain has seen a reduction in its hard power since the conclusion of the Cold War, currently unable to project its power far from its own borders without the assistance of US logistical and financial support (Webber, 2026) (Barry, 2025). Therefore, any response to the current crisis would be in conjunction with allies, as without US support, it is clear that Britain lacks the independent capacity to influence Iranian actions, therefore making a coalition inescapable rather than optional.

The constraints that Britain faces require Starmer to consider the long-term implications and the need to keep face, both with allies and the wider international community; consequently, Britain faces a difficult choice between commitment to the coalition and neutrality.